dec 18 lecture

KHAN JR VS SIMBILLOcan no. 5299 aug 19 2003

suspended for 1 yearfor publishing

there is concern that publishing in net, radio etc

sending txtxx sending letters is also unethical

using net not regulated

chan robles is a vitual library but also accepting clients

publishing that their lawyers were competent

it is indirect soliciting

nicolas and de vega law office

atty marlon valderama

e-lawyers solicitationalso

libayan & asso law firmfree legal adviceis also solicitation

why choose us ? -isa solicitation

The sc did not regulate the violation of code ethics

rule 2.04

customary rate ex 20t means u cannot charge lower than that

_--------_------------

jan 7,2015

canon 5

case: hernandez vs padilla ac no. 9387 june 20, 2012

case of disbarment against atty padillapadilla said no lawyer client relationship and he cannot be charged

padilla give advice to be settled

ruling: sc sustained itthere was relationship because he receive apperance fee

case2: santiago vs rafanan AC No. 6252 Oct 5, 2004

rafanan notarized affidavithe failed to put the cedula by reason santiago failed in a case

santiago filed a case

ruling:

sc explain the importance of indicating cedula in affidaviteven if it a practice in locality the non indication of cedula for long yearsit cannot be change the path

he was fined 3 thousand

case3:veroy vs

there was a houseowner give warning to neigbor to evacuate due to dilapidated wall and it happens

the owner was charge and order to pay damages

the lawyer failed tosubmit motion to recon instead submit for extension

case 4: benito vs balindong Am no rtj 08 2103 feb 23, 2009

employee was terminatedby mayorombudsman said case was merit and order the mayor to pay and suspended

mayor file at rtc jufge balindongwhich was approved the injuction and tro

benito appealed in sc

sc ruled that judge should know thelaw and his defense in good faith is not acceptablehe was fine 10 t and 30t for gross ignorance.

case5:Pp vs Gacott Jr. Gr No. 116049. July 13,1995

gross ignorance:

trend on specializationbenefits

lawyers choose to concentrate , competense

greater expertise

general cannot compet especialist, much less expensive

canon 7

--------------------Jan 9 2015

Canon 6cases:

Cuenca vs CA. Gr 109870. dec 9 1995

far eastern coy vs Ppa. Gr No 136068. Oct 1 1998

Austria vs AbayaAm No, R-705 Rtj

Collantes vs RenomeronAC No. 305

atty renomeron was disbarred for his act of oppression

remedy: file a petition for admission

pcgg vs sandigan lucio tan

genbank has a probscentral bank has extended supportrule 6.03genbank was not able to recover lucio tan was d hihest bidder

estilito mendoza intervene Canon

January 21,2015 Legal Ethics Lecture

Cases: Canon 7 take note “At all times”

1.) Silverio-Buffe A.M. No. 08-6-352RTC2.) Ventura v Samson A.C No. 9608, 11/27/12

Rule 7.011.) Leda v.s Tabang, A.C No. 2505, 2/21/92

Rule 7.031.) Barandon, Jr v.s Ferrer Sr., A.C No. 5768, 3/26/102.) Galicinao v.s Martinez, AC No. 639610/25/053.) Tumbukon v.s Pefianco, A.C No. 6116, 8/1/124.) Macarrubo v.s Macarubo A.C No. 6148 2/27/045.) Guevarra v.s Eala A.C No. 7136 8/1/07

Lecture 1/22/. 15 ethics

Canon 8

1. Que vs revilla A. C No. 7054 12/4/09Filed a petition for annulmentof judgement

Rule 8.011. Seludov.s Judge Fineza A.M No. RTJ-03-1813 11/21/03

Congenital liar2. Foddsphere,Inc v.s Atty Mauricio Jr A.C No. 7199 Jly 22, 2009

Seeling can goods CDO liver spread